Replies

1. The validity of evolution in no way depends on the question of how life first arose, just as the validity of meteorology (the study of weather) depends in no way on where the air came from originally.

Hogwash.

You mean to tell me that in the history of the cosmos, a mysterious force so powerful that it would affect the whole of future life - know as "evolution" - sprung into being out of nowhere? The validity of evolution is very dependent upon the question of how life first arose because in that very question is the explanation of how a new cosmic force arose. The laws of gravity, thermodynamics, or even the understood nature of mass in the theory of relativity did not just spring up out of nowhere one day on the cosmic calendar. I would expect the force of "evolution" to be no different. If it is a force that guides the development of life, it necessarily must have exited prior to the creation of first life and affected its outcome.

Furthermore, "meteorology" is not a proposed causal force in the universe, it is an attempt to understand how particular forces act to affect our weather. Understanding what first caused weather would be most beneficial to current meteorologists as they could compare today's movement with the first movements and make more accurate predictions for the future - which evolution has failed to do, I might add. So, your analogy fails.

No really, evolution does not care how the first lifeforms came to be. Seriously, it doesn't. Insisting otherwise just means that you want a stawman to knock down.

bookmark